Topics

Mayor Matt Brown appears to be backing away from London’s $880-million light rail dream as harsh realities line up against the potentially transformative plan.

While the new federal budget earmarks $1.5 billion for transit across Ontario, veteran London MP Irene Mathyssen believes that will provide nowhere near enough to bankroll what’s needed for light rail here.

Mathyssen, the NDP MP for London-Fanshawe, notes London’s light-rail request from Ottawa (roughly $375 million) would take up one-quarter of the federal transit funding set for all of ­Ontario over the next three years.

“The chances of London getting what it really needs is pretty limited when you look at the entire province,” she told The Free Press Wednesday. “I would keep pushing” if I was at city hall, she added. “I would keep lobbying simply because it’s too important to let go.”

While the federal Liberals downplay Mathyssen’s response as alarmist, she raises a valid question: Are London’s political leaders effectively lobbying for light rail?

Is the mayor pushing the provincial and federal governments on behalf of London to make light rail — as opposed to the cheaper, bus-only rapid transit system — a reality?

In a recent interview before the federal budget, Brown was asked specifically whether he would declare his support for light rail.

“No. I’m prepared to make an evidence-based decision. And that evidence is going to come within the final business case” that’s expected this spring, Brown said. “Let’s get the right program for London.”

Wednesday, he further clarified his stance and again resisted a full embrace of light rail.

“I’m excited about moving forward with the right rapid transit program for London,” he said.

“I’m optimistic that we’ll find the right program for London. Light rail would be a significant improvement, as would a bus rapid transit system.”

In November, Brown voted with his council colleagues to make the bus/light rail hybrid system London’s preferred early option for rapid transit.

A council colleague who’s arguably the most passionate light rail advocate struck a different note Wednesday.

There are essentially two rapid transit options for London: An $880-million bus/light rail hybrid or a $475-million bus-only system. In either case, city hall is staking $125 million.

And that may be part of the challenge: Traditionally, funding for such projects is split evenly between the municipality and the federal and provincial governments, with one-third each.

London would need much more than two-thirds from senior governments for light rail.

But with the federal budget earmarking only $1.5 billion for transit for an entire province, and last month’s provincial budget making no specific commitments to London, the money could be a huge barrier.

Helmer, however, noted Tuesday’s federal budget indicates a willingness for Ottawa to pay up to 50 per cent of “eligible costs” for transit projects.

While London Transit Commission officials note there’s no clear definition for the word “eligible,” they’re taking positives from the federal Liberal government’s first budget.

“Generally, it’s good news that the federal government is becoming more involved in infrastructure funding,” said London Transit boss Kelly Paleczny. “Historically (Ottawa), especially on public transit, (has said) ‘that’s not within our purview.’”

Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal MP for London North Centre, disagreed with Mathyssen’s view, noting there’s a larger pot of infrastructure funding to be unveiled in the 2017 budget.

He also pledged support for rapid transit — but was more tepid when asked specifically about light rail.

“I’ve always said we need rapid transit in London,” Fragiskatos said. “Rapid transit is essential. But we have various forms of rapid transit that could be pursued, but we need to be fiscally responsible at the same time.”

With Kitchener-Waterloo getting light rail, London moving ahead with bus-only RT could be seen as the city falling another step behind its peer municipalities.

It’s no secret London Transit officials are uncomfortable with the city hall-led plan for bus/light rail as opposed to bus-only.

London Transit’s retired general manager, Larry Ducharme, has spoken out against light rail. A longtime chair of the transit commission has also raised questions about light rail’s fit for London.

Light rail’s success here would be contingent on Western University’s cooperation, given the heavy number of students who use transit. But top Western officials have sent clear early signals that while they support a bus-only system, they don’t want light rail running through campus.

Light rail boosters have noted it would bring in twice the public investment as bus-only rapid transit, and could spark a similar boom in private-sector development.